4.6 Article

Defect Chemistry and Mixed Conduction in Lithium Lanthanum Titanate During the Transition from Electrolyte to Anode Material

期刊

出版社

ELECTROCHEMICAL SOC INC
DOI: 10.1149/1945-7111/acd480

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

LLTO is a promising material in Li ion battery application due to its stable ambient and high ionic conductivity. Under high Li chemical potential, LLTO undergoes a transition from an electrolyte to a high rate capable electrode material. However, the exact voltage of this transition and the electronic conductivity of reduced LLTO were unknown. In this study, we investigated the thermodynamics of lithium insertion and the ion and electron conductivity of reduced LLTO, and proposed a defect chemical model that fits well with the experimental data.
Lithium lanthanum titanate Li0.29+delta La0.57TiO3 (LLTO) is a promising material in Li ion battery application, due to its ambient stability and high ionic conductivity. When it is subjected to a high Li chemical potential, additional Li ions intercalate into vacant A sites, which is balanced by the reduction of Ti4+ ions to Ti3+. At this point, LLTO becomes a mixed ion and electron conductor, which means that it undergoes a transition from an electrolyte to a high rate capable electrode material in the potential range below ca 1.7 V vs Li metal. However, the exact voltage of the transition from electrolyte to the electrode, as well as the electronic conductivity of reduced LLTO were still unknown. Here, we investigate the thermodynamics of lithium insertion as well as ion and electron conductivity of reduced LLTO by employing a galvanostatic intermittent titration technique (GITT) and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS). We can show that LLTO gradually changes from electrolyte material to a mixed conductor, with an ion transference number that depends on the Li chemical potential. Lastly, we present a defect chemical model that fits excellently to the U(delta) curves and the conductivity data.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据